Jason Carreira wrote:
If you looked at the Struts Ti proposal, you'd see
that the goal was to start developing advanced features to dramatically simplify development. The whole reason we looked at WebWork in the first place is we wanted a solid foundation so that we could focus on features.

With the merger comes an opportunity for the WebWork
developers primarily to clean up the API and rethink a few things. However, the API discussions we've had so far make it clear these are API cleanups, not
fancy new features.

I must disagree. Bob and Patrick's first cut at the API is a NEW API, not a 
cleanup. It's very different from an end-user perspective, even if we could 
implement it with what we've got.
Please don't judge until we are done. We need to first agree on our design goals, then we can pick through implementations. The proposal is about agreeing to the laid out design goals, but it is too early to say that we are or aren't meeting them. First cuts are never put into production as is, and this API is no different. Besides, even if we did finally go with something more sweeping, to make it acceptable under the original agreed upon proposal, we'd have to ensure existing apps would be able to migrate in hours so you can be sure the end user will have a smooth migration. Otherwise, we'd have to move the API to a new version.

What we need here is cooperation and a willingness to compromise and follow a common path that may not be exactly what everyone wants, but it is what the community agreed is best for the project and its users. My guess is you will always think a new API goes too far, Bob will think it doesn't go far enough, and the rest of the developers will lie along that spectrum. We could either fight every step of the way to force our point of view, or we could work together to find a common vision. I think we owe it to our users to do the latter.

Don

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to